Hockey Calgary looks to ban body checking

[SeeBass]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I hope it passes. Too many kids get out of hockey at this age because its just becoming too rough. Hockey should be a fun game, especially for kids of this age and younger. They shouldn't have to play while continually looking over their shoulder for the gorilla on the other team who could destroy them.

I guess they need to create fun leagues then

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I hope it passes. Too many kids get out of hockey at this age because its just becoming too rough. Hockey should be a fun game, especially for kids of this age and younger. They shouldn't have to play while continually looking over their shoulder for the gorilla on the other team who could destroy them.

Well then maybe they should look at creating hitting and non-hitting leagues. Many kids have dreams of playing hockey professionally, and are trying to develop into the best player they can be.

Those kids need competitve, fast paced, hard hittting hockey to develop and grow as a player. Create another, non competitive league for the kids that are there strictly to have fun, and not have to continuelly look over their shoulder (which is an integral part of hockey by the way).

[kipperfan]

Originally Posted by SeeBass

I guess they need to create fun leagues then

They already have Bantam, Midget and Junior Rec leagues, which are billed as casual, non-contact, "fun" leagues. I would say a much better solution to this problem would be to also create a Peewee Rec league, this way kids have a choice if they want to play contact hockey or not and can start with contact one year and move to non-contact the next year (or vice versa) based on their experiences.

In fact I would probably go so far as to bring body contact into the Atom age group (probably only within the first 3-5 divisions) and also create an Atom Rec league. There is nothing wrong with enabling kids (and their parents) who want to play non-contact hockey, but at the same time we still want to try and develop solid hockey players (as that is what most kids aspire to be) and hockey at high levels is always going to involve some kind of contact.

From my experience the past 10+ years referring minor hockey, coaches are becoming better and better at actually teaching their young players how to properly hit and use their bodies safely and effectively. This is something that was almost non existent when I came up through Hockey Calgary 15-20 years ago and even seemed rare when I started officiating a over decade ago.

Adding Rec leagues and enforcing further training on minor hockey coaching staffs, especially with regards to responsible body contact and concussions, would be a far superior idea to what is currently being voted on.

[Red Slinger]

I'm definately on the fence with this issue.

I coached my kids in some capacity in Calgary Minor Hockey all the way from Tyke to Midget, always on lower level teams. They were always the smallest players on their team and on a couple of occasions they took some massive hits. Fortunatley, neither one ever got seriously hurt but I certainly got a couple of scares.

Between Atom and first year Peewee I put my kids into a bodychecking clinic in the offseason. They were taught why you hit (remove the puck from the player), how you hit, how you take a hit and the danger areas. And they practiced hitting repeatedly. I was the head coach of their first year Peewee team so in addition to doing skill development drills and strategy drills we did quite a few hitting drills. Despite all the practice almost every game their was at least one player who got hurt (not injured) from a big hit that they could have prevented. This resulted in some of the players being more concerned about getting hit than in playing hockey. It also resulted in some of the players more concerned about giving a big hit than making a big play.

So, in that regard I would certainly be in favour of eliminating contact in the lower leagues especially. When you get into the top teams (1,2) there is a higher level of skill and they players can generally control their actions on the ice a little better. In the lower leagues a lot of the players are still trying to master some of the skating fundamentals (eg. backwards crossovers). So, when you have a player that is not great on his skates they may have a harder time delivering a clean body check than a div 1 player. If I recall correctly the Russian system doesn't teach any bodychecking until much later on. As a matter of fact, I believe that they start with perfecting their skating and then only introducing sticks and pucks. In any case, the Russians that come over here to play certainly aren't the most physically intimidating specimens but a lot of them are highly skilled hockey players. I know which I'd rather have my sons be like.

On the other hand, if you introduce body checking slowly earlier on when most kids are closer in ability and size it may help later on. The kids may soon learn that it is a part of the game and it becomes natural for them rather than an opportunity later in life to exert their machismo and unleash a little pent up testoterone. Although, it might also discourage a lot of kids from playing hockey that shy away from physical contact.

I suppose the bottom line is this: are kids more likely or less likely to get hurt with or without contact. Based on some of the studies quoted above they say, as I understand it:

-The level of injuries drops significantly in players playing in a non-contact league; However...
-The level of injuries increases significantly for players who played in non-contact leagues and now play in a contact league

Is that about right?

If so, I'd suggest the remedy is for no contact prior to Bantam (maybe even Midget?), however, Hockey Calgary has to mandate that all players and coaches attend body checking clinic to learn the fundamentals, philosophy, technique and to practice it safely. This should probably be held 3-4 times a year starting in the first year of contact.

On the other hand, in Calgary at least, there is a rec league already where there is no contact. So, do we really need another one? However, when I offered this option to my kids they scoffed at it because they thought playing in that league would make them seen as wusses.

Like I said, on the fence.

[Rerun]

Well I guess the point is now moot.

Hockey Calgary’s 24 associations elected to keep legal hits in the game after the highly divisive issue was taken to a league-wide vote Saturday at Hockey Calgary’s annual general meeting.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/Update+...#ixzz1ylftaFx9

[Northendzone]

i would sure like to know the exact results of the vote.

i wonder where HC goes from here?

i hope that we have made the right decision for the kids.

[puffnstuff]

Bump...after the ban on hitting passed for peewee a couple of years ago, but at least done the right way, after Hockey Alberta lead the way. HC has now added Bantam 4 and below to the ban.

[Ashasx]

Bantam!?

[Angelamc]

Originally Posted by puffnstuff

Bump...after the ban on hitting passed for peewee a couple of years ago, but at least done the right way, after Hockey Alberta lead the way. HC has now added Bantam 4 and below to the ban.

My son was ahead of the peewee ban by one year and was playing quadrant bantam that year and man it would have been hard to watch had he not at least been checking for two years of peewee prior. Of all the years my son has played hockey the greatest size variance was during his two bantam years, some kids hitting growth spurts early and looking like small man children and some kids looking like they are 10 years old. I'm sure HC has their research and studies to back the decision up but I still think that it is better to get the kids to learn to take and deliver checks earlier, when they are smaller and more or less the same size and all I have to back that up is a decade spent at the rink, so just my humble opinion.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Bantam!?

If you are playing bantam 4, there's probably no reason to body check.

[stampsx2]

I quit playing hockey and stopped watching after seeing too many intentional injuries. If i have a good game and score to put our team ahead, i'm a target. Not my kind of sportsmanship. Turned me off of hockey. If they remove hitting then good.

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

If you are playing bantam 4, there's probably no reason to body check.

Just because a kid doesn't have a future as a professional doesn't mean he has no reason for contact in sports.

It's like going to the bowling alley and getting the bumpers just because I'm not a part of the PBA.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Just because a kid doesn't have a future as a professional doesn't mean he has no reason for contact in sports.

It's like going to the bowling alley and getting the bumpers just because I'm not a part of the PBA.

That's a silly comparison. What risk to the bowler do bumpers pose exactly?

[Ashasx]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That's a silly comparison. What risk to the bowler do bumpers pose exactly?

The point is that the game completely changes.

Non-contact leagues already exist for every age group in the city. Let the individuals decide whether they want to play the real sport. Don't force a non-contact game on them all the way through bantam.

And then what? Suddenly you can hit in midget?

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

That's a silly comparison. What risk to the bowler do bumpers pose exactly?

Spot on. The driving force behind eliminating hitting has to do with safety not with making the game easier.

[Northendzone]

Messy for those associations who have a team 2 playing in div 4

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Spot on. The driving force behind eliminating hitting has to do with safety not with making the game easier.

I've gone into detail before, but I'm intimately familiar with what concussions from hockey can do to your children. It's awful and I cannot still understand our rationalize why I once thought it was worth the risk

[Yanda]

I support Contact in Atom

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

The point is that the game completely changes.

Non-contact leagues already exist for every age group in the city. Let the individuals decide whether they want to play the real sport. Don't force a non-contact game on them all the way through bantam.

And then what? Suddenly you can hit in midget?

I actually think that outside of quadrant hockey, there shouldn't be hitting in hockey at all. I'd all be all for quadrant hockey starting in Pee Wee.

Non-contact hockey leagues are garbage, why can't you still play a competitive game without body contact. To be clear, I would expect officials to use judgement, allowing for greater "rub outs" in bantam, but guys taking runs and open ice hits is bull ####.

Women's hockey isn't "completely different" because it lacks body contact, it's "completely different" because the people playing it just aren't as good.

[Angelamc]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

I actually think that outside of quadrant hockey, there shouldn't be hitting in hockey at all. I'd all be all for quadrant hockey starting in Pee Wee.

Non-contact hockey leagues are garbage, why can't you still play a competitive game without body contact. To be clear, I would expect officials to use judgement, allowing for greater "rub outs" in bantam, but guys taking runs and open ice hits is bull ####.

Women's hockey isn't "completely different" because it lacks body contact, it's "completely different" because the people playing it just aren't as good.

Quadrant hockey (AA & AAA) doesn't start in Peewee, it starts in Bantam (In Calgary)
the game of hockey involves checking, should we request that NHL level players stop checking? How do you start eliminating parts of the game at whatever level? Whether they are headed to the Chel or going to rock a beer league in future, trying to decide what age these kids start to learn how to ‘grind’ it out is the question here, I think anyhow, and it should be younger not older as they can do far less damage figuring it out at a 100 pounds soaking wet than they can when there is a great difference size wise and get to heavier weights where more damage can happen (which is the case with Bantam aged boys currently).